The use of gender with zoonims in English and Uzbek

The use of gender with zoonims in English and Uzbek

Introduction

It is a great honor for us that the model of reforming the educational system and experience of its implementation developed in Uzbekistan is being discussed with contribution from outstanding academics and experts, heads and representatives of world-renowned education institutions and eminent international organizations.

To start with, it needs stressing that the education reforms program adopted fifteen years ago and dubbed the National Program for Training of Specialists stands as an inseparable and integral part of our own «Uzbek model» of economic and political reforms based on gradual and evolutionary principle of building a new society in the country.

The program, itself a product of an in-depth research and study, summary of the practice hoarded by advanced nations, aims to completely eliminate stereotypes and dogmas of the communist ideology imposed in the past, consolidation of democratic values in the minds of people, first and foremost among the growing generation. In a word, the program is directed at nurturing a comprehensively advanced individual with independence in thinking and outlook, with its own preferences and firm civic position in life.

It was simply impossible to further that goal without radical reconstruction and transformation of the education system that had been there for many years.

Given that about 35 percent of Uzbekistan’s population is children under 16, more than 60 percent are the youths under 30, the role and significance of these reforms becomes clear and obvious.

In accordance with the adopted program, we have introduced a 12-year universal compulsory and free education in Uzbekistan on the scheme 9+3. The fundamental characteristic of the model being built in our country is that following the nine years of study in a general school, during the ensuing three years young people attend specialized professional colleges and academic lyceums where every one of them, along with the general disciplines, obtains vocational training on 2−3 professions in demand in the labor market.

The law secures that the 12-year education in Uzbekistan is mandatory and free for all, and is conditioned by the fact that the growing generation is obliged to receive a 12-year education, attain a concrete vocation and profession. This is particularly true for our girls.

In this respect, we imply that in every newly created family, it is important that the young women have a certain profession, with their own views and their firm position in life.

Thus, it is imperative that following a nine-year general education, where general knowledge is taught in wide spectrum of disciplines, the youths, and mandatorily our girls, continue with education in colleges and academic lyceums, obtain a profession in two or three areas.

After 12-year compulsory education everyone by his or her choice can continue study at higher education institutions to obtain undergraduate and graduate degrees.

The present qualification paper is titled «The use of gender with zoonims in English and Uzbek» and it is devoted to the problems of studying the category of gender of zoonims in English and Uzbek languages.

As has been mentioned above there is a little deal of researches on this theme are going on, but among them the works which were dedicated to reveal the essence of the question under discussion from the point of investigation. The present qualification paper introduces the productive suffixes of nouns in the English languages in cognitive ways of analysis and gives different kinds of information about them.

The aim of our research is to provide a range of original, theoretical, structural and practical ideas of learning the category of gender of zoonims in English and Uzbek languages.

For the investigation of the given problem, it is required to solve the following tasks:

· to survey the notion of gender as a grammatical category;

· to define the main ways of expressing the category of gender in both languages;

· to investigate the historical review of the problem;

The methods of the work: include methods of structural and semantic and componential analysis of category of gender of zoonims in English and Uzbek languages.

The novelty of the given qualification paper is to get a good idea of the of category of gender of zoonims.

The problem under consideration in the qualification paper possesses definite theoretical value, for, fist of all, it is based on the principles of approach, which is, revealed on all the stage of investigation. The results of the investigation present interest for a number of fields of contemporary linguistics: lexicology, theoretical and practical grammar.

The practical significance of the work: is that the work, will be useful and fruitful information for the learners of the languages, students, teachers as well as interpreters. Besides, the materials of the present paper can be used in seminars and lectures on lexicology, practical and theoretical grammar of the English language and comparative typology of English and Uzbek languages.

The content of the given work consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion, practical part, summary and the list of selected literature under discussion.

Introduction establishes the purpose, the tasks, novelty, the methods used in the investigation, practical and theoretical significance of the work and explains the reasons of choosing the theme for studying.

The first chapter is titled as «Theoretical bases of investigation» and it covers such important questions as the notion of the grammatical category of gender, the main approaches in investigating the category of gender, zoonims as separate lexical units

Chapter II is titled as «The use of gender with zoonims in English and Uzbek» and it covers such important questions as Theoretical bases of translation English words into Uzbek by expressing the category of gender, generic categorization of zoonims in English and Uzbek.

Bibliography contains more then 30 units which deal with the question under discussion.

1. Theoretical bases of investigation

1.1 Notion of the grammatical category of gender

Science development about language at the present stage can be divided into two stages: the first — structural linguistics (where particular attention is given to a problem of a language categorisation); the second — linguistics as the special social study studying language as a transmission medium of cultural-historical traditions. Occurrence of the new disciplines representing synthesis of linguistics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and other sciences has resulted, including, and to occurrence of new approaches to a problem of a language categorisation, most perspective of which is cognitive approach.

Category is one of the most complicated concepts of a linguistic science. Almost all known linguistic theories are based on various principles of ordering of language elements with the subsequent allocation of classes, groups on the basis of any general property.

In spite of the fact that often categorisation of things is carried out on the basis of generalisation, researchers have come to a conclusion that categorisation process is arranged more difficult. Movement to когнитивным to models begins in Ludwig Vitgenstein’s late philosophy and proceeds psychological researches of Eleonory Rosh and its colleagues. Thanks to works of Eleonory Rosh the categorisation became the major sphere of studying in когнитивной to psychology. There was a new theory of a categorisation — the theory of prototypes. It shows that the categorisation peculiar to the person is based on principles, is far from those laws which are embodied in the classical theory. Researches of Rosh and its colleagues show that generally categories can have the best representatives (they are named by «prototypes») and that all abilities of the person really participate in categorisation processes.

According to J. Lakoff the categorisation provides normal functioning of thinking, perception, activity and speech of the person. When the person reflected on classes of substances (things) — chairs, the nations, illnesses, emotions and in general about any versions of things — he addresses to categories. Out of ability to a categorisation the person could not function in general — neither in a material world, nor in a social and intellectual life. Studying of processes of a categorisation all-important for any approaches to understanding of how the person thinks and as it operates (function), and, hence, without it is impossible comprehension of that does us by people. However the considerable part of categories of thinking cannot be carried to categories of things, they are categories abstract сущностей. We categorise events, actions, emotions, spatial and social relations, and also abstract concepts of the most various types: the governments, diseases, elements of scientific and naive theories, such, as electronics and a cold. Any adequate model of human experience should be based on the theory which precisely describes all our categories — both concrete, and distracted. The offered by J. Lakoff the approach to the theory of prototypes is based on the assumption that mental procedure of a categorisation inherent in the person in substantive degrees leans against human experience and imagination — on features of perception, motor activity and culture, on the one hand, and properties of a metaphor, метонимии and mental figurativeness — with another [Lakoff, 1987].

While supporters of cognitive linguistics consider categories as mental essence, supporters of structural linguistics represent categories in the form of separate constructions which are clearly defined in all spheres of human experience. In this connection structuralists allocate grammatical (morphological), lexical, semantic and other categories in language. Grammatical categories can be classifying (lexical and grammatical) and form-building (inflectional). The grammatical category represents unity of the grammatical maintenance and grammatical expression. It is possible to speak about presence of a grammatical category only in the event that in language there is a regular conformity between the given grammatical value and formal way of its expression, and thus there is an opposition at least two members — two classes of words for a classifying category or two forms for a form-building category.

The grammatical gender is one of the unexpectedness of grammatical categories least logical and containing most of all. The word grammatical gender is connected usually with a sex designated by it by beings, however the gender and a sex often do not coincide in those languages where the grammatical gender is expressed.

The Encyclopaedic Dictionary makes following definition of a grammatical gender: a grammatical gender — the traditional name of one of groups on which nouns depending on a way of the coordination with them adjectives, verbs, etc. (masculine, feminine, neuter. In some languages — masculine, feminine. Common gender is possible also). The category of gender has developed on the basis of initial semantic classification by signs «live — lifeless» and (or) «man's — a female». In some languages the category of gender is absent [СЭС, 1989:1142].

The grammatical gender is considered «the paleontologic» category which roots leave in mythological thinking. The Indo-European three-gender system is considered by the majority of linguists as result of transformation of more ancient system from two classes. There are different points of view on an origin of a category of a gender. A. Meje considered that it developed on the basis of opposition animateness — inanimateness [Meje, 2003], other linguists deduced it from opposition activity — passivity [Kirilina, 1999].

The grammatical gender in some cases corresponds to a sex of person, designated by a corresponding word (the teacher — the teacher). It concerns first of all designations of people. Semantico-symbolical function of a category of a grammatical gender consists also that at an embodiment the word grammatical gender is comprehended as a sex. So, the death in Uzbek culture symbolises a female image, and in German — man’s, since. In German language this word concerns a masculine gender (der Tod).

As the feministic criticism of language affirms that the masculine gender is used more often, than a feminine gender for a designation of persons, whose biological gender is unknown, or has no value in the given context. In a number of works [Klein, 1987] the data proving such point of view is obtained. At the same time, researches of last decades bring an attention to the question on unequal psychological communication of a grammatical gender and a sex in consciousness of carriers of different languages [Konishi, 1994]. For example, there is data about mental correlation of a grammatical gender and a sex in German language, rather than in Spanish.

1.2 The main approaches in investigating the category of gender

grammatical zoonim lexical

The study about the category of gender has an old tradition. Antique grammarians were interested in this question. For example, Varran Mark Terentsy, the Roman philosopher and grammarian, at an explanation of a grammatical gender at those or other nouns designating animals, started with their practical value for human life. He said that though behind any speech the natural thing disappears, however, if it does not reach practical application also words do not reach it; it is said equus «ай?ир» and equa «сигир» because their distinctions have practical value.

Caesar Shesno Djumarse (a XVIII-th century) in certain cases became on a position of an aggressive formalism. It completely denied communication of a gender of nouns with sexual distinctions. Triviality of a gender the scientist tried to confirm with absence of a morphological gender at English nouns, discrepancy of a gender in various languages, and also that in the French language two genders, and in Greek and Latin — three [Danilenko, 1990:179].

English grammarian J. Хэррис, engaged in research Indo-European languages, correlated forms of a gender of inanimate nouns to their real extralanguage maintenance. For example, he explained an accessory of a noun «sun» to a masculine gender, and a noun «moon» to female to that sun beams are stronger (man's quality), than at the moon, at which they more thin and soft (female quality).

The thought that in an extreme antiquity people assimilated inanimate objects animated is quite comprehensible, but existence of grammatical gender in Indo-European languages basically is connected with morphology, i.e. words shared on childbirth according to the terminations of these words [Danilenko, 1990:204].

In modern foreign and domestic linguistics there is the extensive literature devoted to a problem of a category of gender in English language. Earlier various aspects of a problem of a grammatical gender such as communication between value of a noun and it comes [Lohmann, 1960], conformity of gender in respect of the maintenance and in respect of expression [Jakobson, 1932; Ельмслев, 1975], from the point of view of syntactic and contextual communications [Zaliznyak, 1964; Karpinsky, 1961], from the point of view of its origin and evolution, i.e. in diachronic aspect [Fodor, 1989], also the sex problem was studied synchronical [by Markus, 1984]. O. Espersen specified in discrepancy of language and «natural» categories. `language and sex' a lot of attention in its researches [Jespersen, 1943] is given to the theme.

Within the limits of the given work to shine the maintenance of all works it is impossible, however nevertheless it is necessary to state short hypotheses of different researchers about an origin and grammatical gender functions.

There are three basic hypotheses of an origin of a grammatical gender: semantic, morphological and syntactic. Supporters of the semantic concept (I.G. Gerder, J. Grimm, V. Humboldt, T. Jakobi, etc.) Believe that at the heart of a grammatical gender opposition of sex lies; the sex sign was translationred by ancient Endo-europeans on subjects of the lifeless nature. And this carrying over occurred by a principle: all big, fast, active concerns a masculine gender, all small, quiet, passive — to female, and all artificial and collective — to neuter [Gin, 1992]. One more supporter of the semantic concept of an origin of a grammatical gender G. Korbett recognizes that the grammatical gender system is morphological system, but thus considers that it also has a semantic basis, that is the linguistic category of gender is connected with «an extralinguistic category of a biological sex». This semantic basis becomes obvious, when any sex corresponds with a word designating the person (i.e. the word designating the person of a female, as a rule, is a feminine gender word) [Corbett, 1991].

Supporters of the morphological concept treat sex as the formal category which essence consists in classification of substantives, instead of reflexion of an extralanguage reality. And the opposition on sex is perceived as result of the latest rationalisation of nominal morphology [Gin, 1992].

Supporters of the syntactic concept (G. Shteyntal, V.V. Joffe) believe that the gender is possible only in such languages in which there is such syntactic link, as the coordination. If the noun has a gender category the adjective should also have this category, history of gender is a history of the coordination, and connection of a gender with sex — is secondary.

It is necessary to notice that existence of three hypotheses of an origin of a grammatical gender and allow researchers to consider a gender in different languages from different corners as in different languages the grammatical gender shows those or other functions to a greater or lesser extent, linguists allocate three basic functions of a grammatical gender which correspond to three hypotheses of its origin. Three functions a gender category: semantico-symbolical, syntactic and morphological (registration of a name and different types of declination).

M.J. Blokh specifies in clashes of opinions on a category of gender of theorists and practical grammarians. In the theoretical plan the gender category is considered lexical or «semantic» [A.I. Smirnitsky, 1959], however practical grammarians [M.J. Ganshina and N.M. Vasilevsky], denying presence of grammatical gender, persistently specify in patrimonial distinctions of an English noun [Smirnitsky, 1959; Ганшина, 1972; Vasilevsky, 1974]. Fleas holds the opinion Smirnitsky, considering that, being semantic, the gender category is not excluded, nevertheless, from structure of grammatical categories [Fleas, 1994:52].

With sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics development there were new prospects for research of a category of gender, including its linguistic means of expression. The majority of scientists specify in communication of gender with a sex. The thought on practical conditionality of presence of the names expressing a category of gender (at animals) seems to us lawful. So, in English language masculine and a feminine gender of a noun «pig» is expressed by means of different lexemes «hog» and «sow». Doubts concerning that the gender category has arisen for a designation of sexual distinctions, had unilateral character. The grammatical gender was mainly considered from morphology and syntax positions. However absence of a grammatical category of gender, in our opinion, does not deny presence of a lexical (semantic) or «mental» category of gender for a designation of persons (individuals) male and female.

The system of language, feature of native speakers leave traces and on gender category. A.V. Kirilina, the researcher of gender aspects of language, notices that to the most ancient and long time a unique hypothesis about the reasons of occurrence and functioning of a category of gender became simvoliko-semantic which supporters explained occurrence of a grammatical gender by presence of people of a different sex. This hypothesis was based on onimizm and antromorphizm mythological thinking [Kirilina, 1998].

I.G. Koshevaja, considering theories about display of a category of gender, allocates J. Grimma’s theory and K. Brugmana’s theory. The first considers that the grammatical gender is connected with natural, i.e. last «is translationred» on subjects according to their qualities. According to the theory of Brugmana the gender is considered mechanical process which is caused by the external form [Koshevaja, Dubovsky, 1980: 199−200].

Supporters of this hypothesis (Gerder, the Grimm, V. Humboldt and others) explained extralinguistic motivation of a category of a gender the extralanguage experience. In particular the analysis spent by J. Grimmom, has shown that masculine gender words possess semantics большей forces, speeds, activity, energy, созидательности, primacy while feminine gender names are characterised by passivity, softness, minority [Grimm]. Such vision of correlation of a grammatical gender with words has resulted, in opinion Kirilinoj, to occurrence оценочности in interpretation of a category of a gender: the masculine gender appeared paramount [Kirilina, 1998].

However the simvoliko-semantic hypothesis was not unique. Opening of languages in which the gender category is absent, has called it into question.

In Old English language the gender was expressed morphologically, therefore expression of syntactic links between words by means of their coordination in a gender was its appointment except morphological classification of a noun. And in modern English language morphological indicators of a category of a gender have appeared basically lost, therefore value of a gender in English language is translationred: a) a lexical word meaning: a masculine gender — man, boy; a feminine gender — woman, girl; a neutral gender — table, house; b) personal pronouns — he, she, it; c) in structure of a word by means of suffixes-ess, — ine, — er: an actress, and heroine, a widower, a tigress; d) compound nouns: and woman-doctor; a he-wolf — a she-wolf.

Correlation with that or other is connected with division of nouns on bases which is more ancient, than their division on grammatical genders. Therefore communication of a grammatical gender with natural was not the basic criterion of division of nouns on genders. It speaks both a divergence between a grammatical gender and a sex which took place in certain cases in Old English language, for example: woman (OE. wоfman) was a masculine gender; maiden (OE. mжgden) — a neutral gender. Recognizing that a grammatical gender often does not coincide with natural (i.e. with a sex), many scientists recognize that the form, instead of value is a determinative in a considered problem that, however, is not relevant for modern English language.

As well as in many other languages, the gender category in English language is closely connected with an animateness-inanimateness category, and the inanimateness category practically coincides with a neutral gender category. From here the conclusion that in modern English language of a word are classified «by the nature of» through those subjects with which they correspond quite naturally follows. Formally it is expressed, first of all, in a choice of various personal pronouns. This choice basically is based on an animateness-inanimateness. At the same time in English language there is no simple dichotomy which would allow to correlate all «inanimate» nouns to a pronoun it, and animated accordingly — with he or she [Elmslev, 1975; Yemelyanov, 1988]. Unlike Russian where usually animated names cannot correspond with a neutral gender, in English language there is a whole class of the nouns designating animals, birds and other beings which corresponds with a common gender and has a pronoun it. However and in Russian not sexr, and таксономические relations, thus appears a leading sign of a nomination and they are reflected by a gender category inconsistently. Besides, the opposition initially based on distinction of two sexrs, not бинарна in language: there are words of a neutral gender which can name live beings (the child, animal, an insect). On convention of a grammatical gender the irregularity of display of all properties inherent in this category is imposed.

The gender as actually grammatical category acting in the purest kind in Russian, in modern English language is absent; the gender as a lexical and grammatical category also has appeared partially lost English language in the course of its historical development. In this connection in modern English language, especially the great value gets a gender natural, that is prospective conformity between comes as a language category and natural or biological division on a sex. However the formal nature of a parity between natural and a grammatical gender cannot be absolutely unequivocal as [Timpko, 1970:2], for example, if to take only the isolated words as offers all of them will concern both to musculine, and a feminine gender, and, hence, a grammatical gender will be irrelevant. This remark opens syntagmatic character of a grammatical gender, its essential dependence on a context.

Unique appointment of a category in genders English language is expression of semantic and lexical relations. Hence, at the present stage of development of language in most general view it is possible to speak about a lexico-semantic category of gender though now almost all authors converge that only is obviously not enough semantic criteria for understanding of the difficult nature of a grammatical gender and it is necessary to use all linguistic facts concerning this category.

Especially the great value in modern English language is got by a gender category as a category syntactic, that is as the linguistic category expressing dependence of one words in speech from others [Timpko, 1970:3].

The review of the works devoted to a grammatical gender in English language, allows to notice that traditional allocation of a category of a gender is connected with consideration of two phenomena: expressions of distinctions of a sex and pronominal-substantive correlation — in a role of classifying bases of division of nouns on certain groups which by tradition are called as patrimonial.

In the most widespread variant of classification of biologically caused type (on the basis of a sex with use of the factor of pronominal-substantive correlation) definition of a patrimonial accessory under instructions on a sex quite often disperses from definition of a gender of a noun on its correlation to that or other pronoun of the third party of a singular (she, he and it). As the reason for it ability of the same noun to correlation more than with one pronoun while on conditions of differentiation correlation to pronouns she, he and it represents itself as indicators female, man’s and a neutral gender accordingly serves.

Absence of the fixed order of pronominal-substantive correlation leads to patrimonial mobility of nouns in modern English language.

Thus, having released from specifically grammatical functions, the gender category has turned in modern English language to rather rich and strong means for expression of various categories of cultural-historical character and consequently it represents exclusive interest for sociolinguistics [to Timpko, 1970:4].

1.3 The ways of expressing of category of gender in English and Uzbek

The category of gender exists in Russian and it is represented by a system of three member opposition: masculine gender, feminine gender and neuter gender.

The category of gender is clearly observed in the singular forms. Gender distinctions in the plural forms are considerably obliterated. Masculine nouns include:

nouns which have stems ending in a consonant and a zero morpheme in the nominative case: стол, нож, дуб;

the majority of nouns which have stems ending in a softened consonant and in — й: конь, зверь, герой, шмель, грач;

3) nouns denoting male sex: Коля, дядя, слуга, маэстро, кули.

4) nouns with the augmentative suffixes — ина, — ище derived from

the stem of masculine nouns: домина, домище;

5) nouns with the suffixes ишка, — ишко derived from the

stem of masculine nouns: шалунишка, домишко.

Feminine nouns comprise:

an absolute majority of nouns with the ending — а (-я) in the nominative case of the singular: парта, сестра, земля, стена;

some nouns with a stem ending in a softened consonant excepting — й: тень, сеть, ночь, лень, etc.

Neuter nouns include:

nouns with the ending — o (e): окно, поле;

nouns ending in — мя: время, имя, племя, пламя, знамя;

3) some of the undeclinable inanimate nouns: депо, такси, рагу,

пальто.

As the grammatical category of gender does not reflect anything in the objective world it is not rendered in other languages.

Gender does not cause any interlanguage interferences when English is spoken by Russians.

Nouns Denoting Male Sex

Uzbek nouns denoting male and female sex are of no grammatical significance in contrast to English and Russian ones. The grammatical significance of English nouns denoting male and female sex is observed when they are replaced by the pronouns he and she: I have a brother. He is a doctor. I have a sister. She is a teacher.

English: father, husband, boy, brother, gentleman, uncle, David

bull, cock, actor, hero, director.

U z bek: ота, эр, ака, ука, тога, Салим, х, укиз, хуроз, артист, мураббий, Эргашев, шоир.

Nouns Denoting Female Sex

Engl: mother, sister, girl, lady, woman, Helen, poetess, directress, aunt, hen, cow.

U z b: она, опа, киз, аёл, хоним, Xалима, шоира, ра?? оса, артистка, бия, хола.

Some of the nouns denoting living beings do not express sex:

1) human beings: doctor, friend, cousin, teacher, stranger, neigh;

bour, student, clerk, etc.

2) animals: wolf, dog, bear, eagle, ass, goat, elephant, etc.

If we desire to indicate the sex of what is expressed by those nouns, a word denoting the sex is added to them: boy-friend, girlfriend; man-servant, maid-servant; man-doctor, woman-doctor; male elephant, female elephant; he-dog, she-dog; male (torn-, he-) cat, female — (pussy — she-) cat; he — (billy-) goat, she — (nanny-) goat; dog — (he-) wolf, she-wolf, etc.

In Spoken English there is a tendency to associate the names of animals with the female or male sex.

1) When the noun indicates the sex of the animal it is generally

spoken of as he (lion, tiger, bull, etc) or she (lioness, tigress, cow,

etc);

The tiger approached the camp: his dreadful roar made us shudder. The bull lowered his head.

Our dog is called Jenny; she is of a very good breed.

2) When the sex of the animal is not indicated by the noun, nouns

denoting the larger and bolder animals are generally associated with

the male sex (elephant, horse, dog, eagle, etc), while nouns denoting

the smaller and weaker ones with the female (cat, hare, parrot, etc):

The elephant lifted his mighty trunk The cat has upset her milk

In English inanimate things or abstract notions are usually personified and the nouns denoting them are referred to as belonging to those of the male or female sex. Here are some traditional associations:

1) The things and notions expressed by the noun sun and by the

nouns expressing such ideas as strength, fierceness (anger, death, fear, war, etc) are associated with the male sex:

It is pleasant to watch the sun in his chariot of gold, and the moon in her chariot of pearl. (Wilde)

… it seamed as if death were raging round this floating prison seeking for his prey. (Irving.)

2) The things and notions expressed by the nouns moon and earth, by the names of vessels (ship, boat, steamer, etc), vehicles (car, carriage, coach, etc), countries and by the nouns expressing such ideas as gentleness, beauty (kindness, spring, peace, dawn, etc) are associated with the female sex:

The Moon was behind the clouds but an hour later we saw her in full.

She is a good car. She was a good boat.

France sent her representative to the conference.

It is necessary to distinguish sex and gender in the Russian language. Sex is a logical semantic category which reflects biological characteristic (sex) of living beings.

This category is formed by the aforesaid nouns denoting male and female sex.

Gender is a formal grammatical category which is represented by a system of three-member opposition: masculine, feminine and neuter:

Masculine gender Feminine gender Neuter gender

The formal grammatical category of gender of inanimate nouns does not reflect biological characteristic (sex) of things. For example, the noun стол does not denote sex, but it is a noun of masculine gender.

In the nouns denoting male and female living beings sex and gender coincide:

сын (male sex, masculine gender) дочь (female sex, feminine gender) конь (male sex, masculine gender) курица (female sex, feminine gender)

English nouns denoting sex cause more interferences when English is spoken by Uzbeks, than by Russians. Uzbek students usually make mistakes when replacing them with the pronouns he or she. It is difficult for Uzbeks and Russians to express sex in English when the means of expressing it differ.

1.4 Zoonims as separate lexical units

Zoonims as separate lexical units and as components of steady expressions are widely presented in all languages of the world and concern one of most the most ancient and extended. Features of judgement of an extralanguage reality are reflected brighter in zoonymic lexicon, than in any other area of language. It is characteristic that the name of animals in different languages contains different qualities. It testifies to individuality of figurative thinking of the concrete people that shows difficult associative-psychological process, and also about distinctions in a valuable picture of the world of various ethnoses. The Zoonymic lexicon as object of research deserves special attention also because, submitting to norms of language, it forms a specific subsystem in which there are the laws demanding special studying.

The names of animals (or zoonyms) provide us with all kinds of clues about our ancestors, especially if we study them in connection with anthropological data. And it also works the other way round: etymological studies benefit from anthropology. An excellent example of this type of research is Xaverio Ballester's Zoуnimos Ancestrales. In his book, Ballester analyses a series of zoonimsand reaches interesting (sometimes surprising) conclusions. In many cases, the animals have names related to kinship: they were called «mothers» or «grandparents». An example of this is the Spanish word comadreja (English weasel), from the word for mother (madre in Spanish). There are many more examples, but normally they are not so easy to recognize. In other cases we see the effect of a taboo applied to a given animal, and the substitution of the original name for another (an example of this type of linguistic phenomenon can be seen in this post: The name of the bear). In general, all these terms, coined in a given culture and conditioned by its ideology (religious thoughts, mythology, etc.), are an important indication of the possible chronology of a dialect’s vocabulary. Some zoonyms, for example, are only understandable in the context of a hunter-gatherer society (like the ones in Paleolithic Europe or in some areas of the world today); others originated in the notional world of the farmer, or the shepherd. Ballester’s zoonimsare an open door to our remote past. They are indeed ancestral. Another interesting aspect of this book is the fact that, applying this combination of etymology and anthropology, Ballester is also able to refute some generally established assumptions about animals in antiquity, e.g. the ones about horses in connection with Indo-Europeans. I personally think that his chapter about horses will become a classic in historical linguistics. On the whole, Zoуnimos Ancestrales is a highly interesting and readable book. I strongly recommend it.

2. The use of gender with zoonimsin English and Uzbek

2.1 Theoretical bases of translation English words into Uzbek by expressing the category of gender

Translation is the multidimensional phenomenon providing overcoming not only language, but also cultural barriers. Translation is a kind of communicative activity at which are compared not only language forms, but also language vision of the world and a dialogue situation along with a wide range of the extra language factors defined by the general concept of culture. Hence, the translator carries out the important social function of the intermediary between two communities with different languages and different cultures.

Such approach to translation process has found the reflexion in Breusa E.V.'s treating translation as the certificate intercultural communications [Breus theoretical model, 1998].

Communications process, i.e. dialogue, assumes a generality of language and background knowledge of communicants, their accessory to one society. When there is a necessity for dialogue between communicants, belonging to different language collectives, the language intermediary — the translator who takes the information from the text in one language (SL — the source language) is involved and translations it by creation of communicatively equivalent text on a target language (TL — translating language). Communications carried out by means of the translator can be named intercultural communications [Breus, 1998].

V.N. Komissarov considers translation as a kind of language intermediary at which the maintenance of the text (original) speaking another language is translated to other language by creation in this language of communicatively equivalent text. The communicative equivalence is understood as ability of the text of translation to represent itself as full replacement of the initial text (in the functional, substantial and structural relation). He also states four linguistic theories in which frameworks translation process models are offered, and, accordingly, results four definitions of translation. According to denotative theories, translation is «process of the description by means of a target language denotates, described on a source language» [Commissioners, 1999]. According to transformational theory, «translation is not that other, as transformation of units and source language structures to units and target language structures» [Commissioners, 1999]. According to the semantic theory, translation «consists in disclosing of essence of equivalent relations between the original and translation maintenance» [Commissioners, 1999]. The theory of levels of equivalence offers «the model of translational activity based on the offer that equivalence relations are established between similar levels of the maintenance of texts of the original and translation» [Commissioners, 1999].

Translation process is the search connected with a consecutive choice from possible variants. Carrying out this choice, the translator constantly uses own linguistic and когнитивными knowledge, and, besides, considers linguistic and когнитивные the knowledge of the future readers reflecting features of their culture.

Translation any more is not the isolated area of a linguistic science. The translation process analysis has included new psycholinguistic and cognitive aspects [A. Chesterman, 2000]. Now while translating began to consider sociological, cultural urological and situational factors which have placed translation in a wide social context. Thus very much the great value is got by cultural and communicative aspects, on them becomes more emphasis, than on language of the text.

Last years there were many descriptions of translation as cognitive process. All of them of hypothetical, presumable character because to comprehend that occurs in consciousness of the person at the moment of transformation of the maintenance expressed in one language form, to the same maintenance materialized in other language form, it is not obviously possible at the present stage of development of sciences. The brain activity which product is translation, probably, will be sometime solved by efforts of experts of various scientific disciplines. To open this secret experts in the field of physiology of the higher nervous activity, biochemistry, psychophysiology, physics and other sciences try.

The models of translation process offered by linguists are under construction on the basis of speculative parcels and the conclusions, introspection of translators, etc. For example, transformation model translation is treated as transformation of the text of the source language to the text on a target language. The translator perceives the original, makes in consciousness a number interlanguage transformations and «gives out» ready translation. The main things appear operations on transformation so-called «nuclear syntactic structures» which, according to supporters of this model, coincide in various languages and are characterized by a generality of logic-syntactic links and lexical structure. Differently, the original text is understood as set of initial structures which should be conformity in a target language or these conformity should «be deduced» according to transformation rules. In consciousness of the translator the original text on an analysis phase is minimized in a set of nuclear structures, then on the following phase this set is replaced with equivalent structures of a target language which will then be transformed to the real text of translation corresponding to the original.

It is necessary to mention the so-called theory of language conformity into which problem the establishment of natural conformity between original and translation units at language and speech level enters also. Language conformity can be defined as known realities and, for example, at word level to be fixed in bilingual dictionaries. Speech conformity are established at comparison of concrete texts. For the first time idea of natural conformity J.I. Retsker who has defined on the basis of comparison of texts of the original and translation various types of conformity (equivalent, alternative, contextual) and kinds of translational transformations [has put forward Retsker, 1974].

During the last years special value was got by the communicative theory of translation which considers translation as one of communications kinds (as the certificate of bilingual communications). Translation as process of bilingual communications is in general similar to process of monolingual communications. In the course of monolingual communications there is a message, its sender and the addressee, a code (language) and a communication channel (written or oral speech taking into account a genre of this speech). In the simplified kind it is possible to present the scheme of monolingual communications as follows: the sender codes the message (in any language) and translations it on corresponding channel (oral or written speech), the addressee decodes it (т.е. perceives and comprehends the received information):

THE SENDER> THE MESSAGE> CODING/PROCESSING/DEPARTURE> THE MESSAGE> THE ADDRESSEE

Let’s notice once again that fact that the communications model is process of monolingual communications while the communicative model of translation represents process of bilingual communications. Thus presence of the intermediary (translator) between the sender and the addressee of the message will be the important distinctive feature of communicative model of translation from communications model. Hence, the communication chain while translating will look as follows: the sender codes the message (in any language) and translations it on corresponding channel (oral or written speech), the translator decodes it (i.e. perceives and comprehends the received information), then will recode the apprehended information by means of a new code (other language) and translations it for the final addressee on the same or other channel with preservation of genre features of the initial message:

THE INITIAL SENDER> THE MESSAGE> DECODING (TRANSLATOR) / CODING (THE TRANSLATOR ON OTHER CODE (LANGUAGE))> THE MESSAGE> DECODING BY THE ADDRESSEE

This scheme is based on positions of the theory of communication, and language of the person is considered as an original code. Complicates the scheme that circumstance that the addressee-translator should choose an optimum variant from possible variants of translation of the initial information. Important and that the translator is considered the participant of process of the communications, carrying out double function, the addressee and the sender of the information. In communicative model relations which in semiotics are defined as syntactic, semantic and pragmatical are considered. Semantics, a situation and function make an invariant basis of the statement on source languages and translation.

Distinctions in systems SL and TL and features of creation of texts on each of these languages in different degree can limit possibility of full preservation in translation of the maintenance of the original. Therefore translational equivalence can be based on preservation (and according to loss) the different elements of sense containing in the original. Commissioners, for example, allocates five levels (types) of equivalence depending on what part of the maintenance is translationred in translation for maintenance of its equivalence [Commissioners, 1999].

Any text reflects communicative installations of the sender of the text, carries out any communicative function: informs any facts, expresses emotions, comes into contact between communicators, presence in the course of communications of the similar purpose demands from a receptor of any reaction or actions, etc. defines the general character of translated messages and their language registration. The text can is consecutive or simultaneously carry out some communicative functions, but it should have in the maintenance of a functional problem (the communications purpose), without having lost the communicativeness, i.e. without having ceased to be result of the certificate of speech communications. Result of performance by the text of communicative functions and installations is the communicative effect. It is thus important to keep while translating equivalence of communicative effect of translated units [Nida, 1975].

One more important point while translating is achievement of certain aesthetic influence, artistic image creation as it is the purpose of any work of art. Hence, the literary translation main task is generation on a target language of the speech product having similar is art-aesthetic influence.

However while translating from English into Uzbek words with the expressed category of a gender not always probably to compound, therefore in most cases the translator is guided by norms of a native language according to which one animals and birds appear a feminine gender (a cat, a dog, an owl, etc.), and others — musculine (an elephant, a nightingale, a sparrow, etc.). Thus in Uzbek there are steams of words for a designation of animals as man’s, and female (a cock — the hen, a bull — a cow) where on the foreground the biological gender of an animal (and both words appear marked on the basis of a sex) acts, and also exist such steams of words in man’s and a feminine gender (a cat — a cat, a dog — a dog), where a basic role are played by morphological indicators of words (and on the basis of a sex marked there is only one word from pair), instead of a natural sex of an animal. For example, speaking: I have a dog, the person not necessarily means an animal of a female. At the same time to pick up pair of a feminine gender for a masculine gender noun (and on the contrary) it is possible not always: a cat — a cat, but an owl.

And, though above we specified such steams of words as a dog — a dog, a cat — a cat which allow to pick up while translating from English into Russian language a word in «the necessary» gender, it is very important to consider naturalness of sounding (naturalness) given language unit on a target language. The concept of naturalness of sounding while translating means use of such means of a target language which are perceived by carriers as habitual and natural in the given context. Naturalness of sounding also follows from communicative effect, that is degree of achievement of equivalence of communicative effect while translating. While translating zoonims sometimes there is an infringement denotative equivalence for achievement of equivalent communicative effect of unit of translation, in such cases dynamic equivalence is priority. With reference to translation of names of animals it means that there is a tradition on which this or that animal in English language is presented, for example, in a masculine gender, but in representation of native speakers of Russian the given animal is a feminine gender being that is presented, for example, in folklore and art fairy tales. Here it is represented expedient to speak about polysystem. According to the theory of Tauri, the polysystem represents the system including all literature in this or that language (including the translation literature) and which influences perception of environment the person [Towry, 1987]. Leaning against offered Tauri the theory, it is possible to offer concept of fantastic polysystem which covers all fantastic material in Russian and which forms representation of native speakers of Russian about those or other animals.